Background: There is limited information available regarding the management of IVIG-refractory Kawasaki Disease (KD). Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a second intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) infusion versus intravenous methylprednisolone (IVMP) in patients with IVIG-refractory KD. Methodology: Cochrane Library, PubMed, Medline, Elsevier (Science Direct), Springer Link and BMJ databases were searched from May 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and high-quality prospective and retrospective studies, with population restricted to children 0 months to 18 years, with KD refractory to initial IVIG at 2g/kg, who remained febrile for 24-48 hours after completion of initial IVIG, and who received second-line monotherapy with either a second dose IVIG or IVMP. We conducted a meta-analysis using Review Manager [RevMan] 5.4.1 software. Results: A total of six studies (n=188 patients) were analyzed. The incidence of coronary artery lesions was comparable between a second dose of IVIG and IVMP (RR 0.82, 0.34-1.96, P=0.66) in patients with IVIG-refractory KD. The rate of fever resolution to a second IVIG, compared to IVMP, was not significantly different between groups (RR 0.97, 0.84-1.13, P=0.72). There was a significantly higher incidence of adverse events in the IVMP group (RR 0.42, 0.26-0.57, P=0.0002), but these were all transient and resolved without further treatment. Conclusion: There is no significant difference in the incidence of coronary artery lesions and rate of fever resolution post-retreatment with a second dose of IVIG versus IVMP in IVIG-refractory KD. More adverse events were reported in the IVMP group. Keywords: Mucocutaneous Lymph Node Syndrome, Kawasaki Disease, Refractory Kawasaki Disease, Immunosuppressant, Intravenous Immunoglobulin, Methylprednisolone, Second IVIG Infusion
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.